'Letters from the Flame': 'Lost' about 'Recon'? I have your answers

Share this:

We’re back with another edition of “Letters from the Flame,” kicking it “Recon” style in this week’s “Lost” Q&A. I tried to incorporate many of your questions into both the podcast and last week’s Course Corrections, but as per usual there were a few leftover burning queries that needed addressing before this week’s potentially mind-exploding, nose-bleeding, game-blooping episode.

Before getting into your questions, I have one for you, dear readers. I’m contemplating rolling “Letters” into an audio format, and recording collective answers for that week’s panel based on your inquiries for that week’s episode. This wouldn’t replace the existing weekly podcast, but instead be a shorter, secondary one that would focus less on “audio commentary” style analysis and more on reader questions and concerns.

Here’s the question: is this a good idea? It would be all or nothing: I wouldn’t type up a transcript of a potentially 30-40 minute podcast. And I’d feel bad asking third world country toddlers to do it for me. So it would be either a podcast that replaces this weekly one, or we’d keep things as is. The benefit to the podcast: more parties answering your questions, and more questions answered. The downside: not everyone likes listening to podcasts or can if they are bad little monkeys reading this in their cube on the sly.

So, if you could, let me know in the comments which way you’d like to go. I might still do a second podcast in general with Mo Ryan and our weekly partner-in-podcast-crime, but “Letters” seems the easiest current column to add to the mix. If not, we can always hold beatbox contests or something. But by all means, let me know what you’d like to see/hear happen here in the final half of the final season.

Now, onto the questions!

Ryan, do we know for certain that the individual stories in the sideways timeline are connected to each other? This is why I’m asking:

In “LA X,” when Kate gets in the airport elevator after escaping from Edward, Sawyer sees the handcuffs she’s trying to hide. He helps her get out of the elevator so the airport security guards don’t spot the handcuffs. Then we find out in the “Recon” sideways timeline that Sawyer is an LAPD cop. It seems to me (and I’m saying this with respect) that a cop is always on duty, so why did Sawyer help Kate in “LA X” instead of detaining her?

Is it possible that the Sawyer in the “LA X” sideways timeline is not the same as the Sawyer in the “Recon” sideways timeline? Could it also be possible that Locke’s father in the sideways timeline is not the bad guy he is in Sawyer’s sideways timeline?

Must go lie down now…my head hurts. 🙂Buffy fan

If we’re dealing with more than one timeline, then I think people would revolt. But I wouldn’t worry: as Noel Murray pointed out in our podcast last week, the easiest way to answer Sawyer’s actions in LAX is that he would have drawn attention to himself in the international section of the airport had he acted. Since he was supposed to be in Florida, suspicion would have been aroused had he enabled Kate’s arrest there.

Every episode Smocke seems more Locke like. Are the Man in Black and Locke’s personalities merging?mew for lost

For at least centuries, if not longer, The Man in Black looked for a loophole. What he probably didn’t account for were any side affects that would occur should he ever achieve it. From purely a fan perspective, I LOVE the idea that the old Locke keeps popping out at various times, from shouting “Don’t tell me what I can’t do!” in “The Substitute” to talk of his crazy mother in “Recon.” But it’s unclear to what point this is actually happening, and how much control The Man in Black has over any possible “merge.” Remember: this is an entity that scanned Eko’s entire life just by confronting him, and may have done the same thing when it strobed on Juliet in “Left Behind.” There’s a difference in simply absorbing all of Locke’s memories and actually having them unintentionally incorporated into his new meat suit. For now, let’s keep this possibility in play, but not make an official ruling for the time being.

Sawyer (and the writers) made it pretty clear that “whoever is on my raft, not a hair on their head gets touched”. Do you think that his raft will be the one that shoots at Time-Traveling Season 5 Saywer and Co.? Like you, I’ve been wondering about that moment since it happened. There was a casualty on that boat- Is Sawyer trying to sacrifice himself to save Juliet?John

So I went back and watched this sequence from “The Little Prince” again to try and suss this out. I’m wondering if that second boat is like The Arrow’s glass eye: something brought up for later explanation only to get seemingly dropped later. But here’s a wager: we learn about BOTH the eye and the second raft this season. The eye reveal might be akin to Shannon’s inhaler in terms of relative importance, but you’re right: SOMEONE takes a bullet on the second boat. Not sure if it’s a casualty or not, but someone gets hit. If we see two outriggers land on Team Jacob’s beachfront lot this season, be prepared to see the second half of this scenario.

Why is a submarine easier to pilot than a plane? Sawyer and Kate needed a pilot for the plane, who they gonna get to drive the sub? That chapped my hide last night, and I know it’s a niggling detail but I was PEEVED about the whole locked door/new people thing.mri

So Sawyers great “Sting” is to tell both parties the truth, then commit a proper subjacking? Not exactly a Newman/Redford worthy scam, eh?Brian of the North

I also love how we’re supposed to simply not question the ridiculousness of this plan. HOW are they supposed to take the sub? Is there an inflatable auto-pilot, a la “Airplane!” on board that sucker? I think both modes of transportation available to leave the Island prove that sometimes the answers to lingering mysteries deflate under the pressure of their prosaic answers. It’s like the always say: once you go donkey wheel, it’s hard to go back.

As for your peeved state at the newest “Lost” mystery (what’s behind Sub Door #1?), I have more than a few thoughts on both that mystery and your annoyance. But I think I’ll hold off on that until tomorrow’s post.